Shakespeare and His View on Kingship: Macbeth, King Lear and Othello

NB: We do not resell your papers. Upon ordering, we do an original paper exclusively for you.

NB: All your data is kept safe from the public.

Table of Contents

Introduction
Discussion
Conclusion
Works Cited

Introduction

Anybody who has gone through the works of Shakespeare, or even a little bit of it, can never forget the immortal characters created by him. The focal point of this Essay is about Shakespeare and his view on kingship displayed throughout his plays, Macbeth, King Lear and Othello. It is interesting to note that in these plays, the protagonists are extremely proud and confident but are juxtaposed with specific vices.

Discussion

In Macbeth, we observe a transition of character. This would also include the appearance of the witches when he was pure and loyal to the point of near insanity when he found himself nearing the ultimate stage of becoming evil himself. The text reveals in the opening phase of the drama that Macbeth is an extremely capable warrior in accordance with the account of the captain, thus making him an important aspect of the drama.

It is here through the captains point we come to know that Macbeth is one of the most loyal subjects of King Duncan. Next, we see that Macbeth is interacting with three witches who help us understand the three major attributes of Macbeth i.e. self-doubt, ambition and physical bravery. At the same time, it is beyond doubt in the basement Macbeths character is clean and as a soldier, he is true to his job and his king.

The transition of Macbeth from being a positive character to a negative character came in various phases and aspects of circumstances and political developments. It was not a justification from Macbeths point in the act of killing King Duncan. The only justification for Macbeth was his ambition. He was not pleased with his possession of Glamis and Cawdor, he wanted more. He wanted to be the king himself. It is true that he was instigated by the witches. The witches stated All hail, Macbeth! Hail to thee. Thane of Glamis! / All hail, Macbeth! Hail to thee. Thane of Cawdor! / All hail, Macbeth! That shalt be king thereafter! (Shakespeare, I.3)

This leads to the assassination of Duncan with ample moral and physical support from Lady Macbeth and all this time Macbeth tries to be brave and just to himself but deep inside his morality is broken although Lady Macbeth tried her heart out to justify each evil act of Macbeth. Macbeth knows that he is on the wrong side. For Macbeth, as he mentions time and again, Duncan is more than a king to Macbeth and is like a father to him. Thus with this act of treachery and treason he was, at a sphere, murder his father. This was a huge leap towards being a negative character though he is true to his pride.

At this part, Macbeth becomes an extension of evil spirits such as the witches themselves. At this point whatever Macbeth acts or represents becomes a manifestation of ill fate and unholy intentions. He orders assassinations and tries to kill any and every heir to the throne like a true negative character and this plays an impact on his mind. One major part of this follow-through was Macbeths misapprehension of blood. He saw blood everywhere and it appeared to him that this blood was of Duncans and that it could not be rinsed away.

It would be relevant to mention that the playwright William Shakespeare depicted the character of Macbeth as a metaphor of human ambition gone wrong. This makes a character that starts as a brave and powerful warrior who is completely loyal to his abilities and more so to his king. He is well-loved by his men and friends and the King himself and there is no reason to accept him as a positive hero but gradually we find him rolling into the abyss of evil procedures and ultimately becomes a hated negative character.

This one vision or illusion appears as a striking note to Macbeths morality and thus exposes the inner contradiction of Macbeths ambition, morality, justification and self-doubt. There were his vices but he maintained his pride all through the play, much like the other noble characters in King Lear as Edmund. He is fit to the pattern of Shakespearean notation of King or noble more than King Lear himself.

The character Edmund, as depicted in William Shakespeares The Tragedy of King Lear, epitomizes the Shakespearean insight of dramatization and complexity of character where the issues of kingship or nobility are explored. The characters Edmund and Edgar are bonded by the same bloodline but kept apart socially due to the legitimacy of identity. They searched for their true place in the world. The entire play is directed towards this search for identity through a complex pattern of the human soul.

Edmund is a very fascinating character as he is a sympathetic and complex villain at the same time. He appears to be Machiavellian in nature. He can be stated as an accomplished schemer who is opportunistic and extremely goal-oriented at the same time. He is a bastard by birth. As a result, along with his thirst for power and land one element he really craves is recognition and social status. It appears that the manner he induces himself in serial treachery actually refers to his mode of rebellion against the status of social principles. He always tries to achieve the equal status of Edgar, the lawful or recognized son of Gloucester.

He is a capable and cold villain but there is no denial that he is a complete self-made personality. However, at the end of the play, he is found repenting for his deeds thus it may appear that his actions all though the play was more of a misdirected desire and revenge on the society rather than the work of a true Satan.

Edmund appears to be full-bodied at times, particularly during the end before being defeated, and a huge amount of vanity is incorporated. He states that To both these sisters have I sworn my love; / &. not to debate. (Shakespeare, 79)

However, at the end of the play, we see him regretting his deeds. Yet Edmund was belovd. / &/ That she fordid herself. (Shakespeare, 92) It is to be noted that even in his last notes he tries to prove himself to be beloved and this is his last attempt to gain his identity that was denied. He calls for good deeds and he is ashamed for his evils works as, in a way, he feels that his mission of attaining his identity is completed.

Edger, too, at this point recognizes the fact of his birth. I am no less in blood than thou art, Edmund; / &. The dark and vicious place where thee he got / Cost him his eyes. (Shakespeare, 90) This same Edger challenged Edmund in his last fight. Here too we find a man seeking the justification and true nature of identity. Only this time it was Edger searching for his position from Edmund. Draw thy sword, /That, if my speech offend a noble heart, To prove upon thy heart, whereto I speak, / Thou liest. (Shakespeare, 89)

There are many elements held within William Shakespeares work of King Lear that is consistent with drama, and support themes of justice, loyalty and love. Apart from these, there are other aspects of the character too. In this context, Edmund is also an expression of compassion and understanding, a profession of honor and faith in the existence of friendship, camaraderie, love and justice. Edmund reveals that friendship exists in the idea that regardless of whether or not they all would believe what one would say, they all believe that the experience affected the comrade in some form and would prove sympathetic toward their emotional state. However, the most profound element that comes out of character is pride no matter how much it is eclipsed by the frustration of recognition.

However, before analyzing Othello, we must observe the society where this play was written. The Shakespearean era was a very significant one regarding its bringing about a supreme change in the moral values of people dwelling there. It was distinct in terms of imposing a strict moral code of conduct on society. The moral values however were more prominent on women than on men. It is an interesting observation that the manner Victorian people wished to be perceived as respectable, high moral values and family orientated. However, firstly the upper class were anything but moral behind closed doors (use of prostitutes, etc) and did not look after their children themselves (nannies, wet nurses and boarding schools) and the lower classes were too busy just trying to survive to get involved.

Under such conditions racial inequalities were obvious and skin color was the main objective as seen in the play, Othello. Othello possesses a distinct underlying touch of racism revolving around the play. First of all, Othello, the main character, has been described as a Moor, a term used to refer to the dark-skinned people by the European people in general. The term was often confused with Arab people also.

The term reflects hatred for dark or black skin irrespective of the country to which the owner of the skin belongs. That could refer to any part of the world which was different from Europe and to any people who did not have snow-white skin. Othello himself has been made to comment on his dark skin in the play such as Haply for I am black (Shakespeare 837). Thus, he is proud to be what he is. He found no other comparison to make with Desdemonas imaginary adultery to express the immense depth of her sin except black as mine own face.

Desdemonas beauty and her white skin have been described in the play to contrast Othellos black skin such that it appeared darker, that whiter skin of hers than snow (Shakespeare 852). Thus, it is clear that his authority is unchallenged even by his skin tone and he is extremely proud of it even though he possessed a vise of jealousy.

In his plays, the kings, or authoritative characters like Othello, possess a divinity in the sense that their words are more than command, more of a sermon. As in Macbeth, I am in blood / Stepped in so far, that, should I wade no more, / Returning were as tedious as go oer (Shakespeare, III. 4. 135137). On the other hand, they are often portrayed as fools in Othello, for believing Yargo. The same is true when we find Macbeths inability to read faces as he fails to understand the intentions of Lady Macbeth. The same can be seen in King Lear as he is gradually losing his possessions and power.

Conclusion

These elements are of interesting notions as these were incorporated in the plays to please both the rich and the poor audiences alike. Shakespeare appealed to both the rich seeing plays at court and the commoners seeing a play at globe theatre. The rich were happy to visualize themselves as courageous and brave. At the same time, the Kings were the protagonists of the plays and the rich could easily identify with the main characters.

On the other hand, the poor found it amusing to find the richer classes in peril and making silly mistakes. This way, Shakespeares plays managed to hold the attention of both the classes by portraying the Kings and authorities in a gallant yet psychologically weak manner.

Works Cited

Shakespeare, William. The Complete Works of Shakespeare, Vol. 11. Auckland: Classic Books Company, 2001.

Shakespeare, William. The Complete Works of Shakespeare, Vol. 6. Auckland: Classic Books Company, 2001.

Shakespeare, William. The Complete Works of Shakespeare, Vol. 1. Auckland: Classic Books Company, 2001.

Click Here To Order Now!

Shakespeare and His View on Kingship: Macbeth, King Lear and Othello

Do you need this or any other assignment done for you from scratch?

We have qualified writers to help you.

We assure you a quality paper that is 100% free from plagiarism and AI.

You can choose either format of your choice ( Apa, Mla, Havard, Chicago, or any other)